Jump to content
Wednesday, July 12, 2017
  • Welcome to the forum!

    Welcome to the War History Online Community Forum, please register or login to start commenting.

Maryann Harty

Please stop using the term "awarded"

Recommended Posts

PLEASE  have your writers STOP using the term "awarded or win" when referring to someone who has RECEIVED the Medal of Honor.

Those people didn't go out planning to "WIN" the MoH...It's a small request but it is the correct way to refer to this great honor.

Regards,

Maryann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that "win"is quite inappropriate. Actively seeking a decoration is seldom an aim of the receipient.

On the other hand " Awarded" seems fine. It is a acknowledgement by authority of heroism rather than a goal of the hero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a writer, I think it's a very valid point.  However, I'm not sure how I feel about the term "awarded".  If we take into consideration the modern use of the word and it's actual definition, it can easily be taken to mean the actual process of presenting something that is due.  In that respect, I don't think it has the quite the same connotation as "win".  Having said that, it can be understood to mean the presentation of a "prize" which the original poster is objecting to.  I definitely understand and agree with ceasing to use the term "win" when speaking of the Medal of Honor but I think "awarded" might be debatable.  Anyone else have any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jon M Brown said:

As a writer, I think it's a very valid point.  However, I'm not sure how I feel about the term "awarded".  If we take into consideration the modern use of the word and it's actual definition, it can easily be taken to mean the actual process of presenting something that is due.  In that respect, I don't think it has the quite the same connotation as "win".  Having said that, it can be understood to mean the presentation of a "prize" which the original poster is objecting to.  I definitely understand and agree with ceasing to use the term "win" when speaking of the Medal of Honor but I think "awarded" might be debatable.  Anyone else have any thoughts?

 

The term "received" is merely the result of an "award". Thus, if there was no "award" there would be no reception.

But if  "award" is not acceptable, then what ?   "Invested" ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The correct term, in US service, is "decorated" as in a full dress awards parade when the command is given by the adjutant:  "Colors and personnel to be decorated . . . Center . . . March!" At which point the band plays an appropriate number, the colors come forward from the center of the formation, and the personnel to be decorated come traipsing out from wherever they had been stashed and form a line, senior decoration to the right as they face the reviewing stand and between the colors and the reviewing party. 'Struth for certes the word "decorate" is rarely used by anyone to describe pinning or hanging a medal on someone.

That being said, "received" is okay and, yes, even "awarded," in the non specific vernacular, but never, ever, any form of "win" or "won" . . . performing an act for which one is decorated is/was not a competition.

And a posthumous award, usually given to the next of kin . . . the decoration, whatever it might be, is presented to such, though the reality is for Medals of Honor, Navy Crosses, Distinguished Service Crosses, and Air Force Crosses, the top tier medals for valor in US service, presentations are usually fairly public affairs.  Below that, such presentations tend to be less ostentatious and are generally fairly private affairs usually conducted in an office somewhere.  By the end of the WW2, posthumous decorations were simply mailed to the next of kin with a nice letter from somebody important and the citation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think the word "award or awarded" is fine. It has little to do in suggesting that the recipient was actively and purposefully seeking such an award. It is also not likely. To qualify for any medal of honour requires the kind of bravery that few would actively and purposefully seek. Very unlikely.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×